Sorry if I missed this somewhere but how do the variants work in the ATD2 scenario? I'm playing a PBEM game of Husky where the allied navy was released early and I don't think we chose to have variants - they seem to just be happening in the scenario.

Does ATD2 work this way? If a PBEM game is started will variants occur? Or do they only occur if the "Mystery Area of Ops" option in chosen when setting up the game?

If it's the same as Kharkov, then as far as I understand it, if Mystery Variants are selected then the AOs are set "randomly" at game start. If Mystery Variants are not selected (you choose historical AOs) then units should be locked down to their historical AOs.

In a PBEM I'm playing of AtD at the moment with mystery variants turned on, my variant as Russian is something like: "when playing with hidden unit values on, unit values are even more rsndom". Since I never play with hidden unit values (does anyone?) this is not a variant at all. Hidden unit values itself is a kind of mystery variant. Can we not have mystery variants that are variants of variants please!! The net result is that I am playing historical AOs!!

For me, AOs are a great system. But they only work as long as your opponent is not aware of your AOs. Experienced players are well aware of both sides' historical AOs, and can focus attacks on the 'faultlines' between AOs, or entire Armies can be confidently left to 'wither on the vine' while attacks are placed elsewhere. I think that mystery AOs should much more drastically affect the historical AOs (in the case of AtD this is more important for the Russian player) so that the other player can not be confident of what restrictions his opponent is under.

For the player working under their limitations, AOs are a really interesting and sophisticated feature that reflect historical operational doctrine. But for the player who knows his opponents AOs, they make the game slightly farcical: what we had in Kharkov was the sight of panzer collumns halting outside key towns because they didnt want to take the town and trigger a new AO for the opponent.

In a nutshell - there needs to be greater variation in mystery variants. And mystery variants that only have an effect when another variant is turned on are a waste of space!

This something I play from time-to-time. Truly the most underappreciated feature of SSG's games (IMHO anyways).

Stock scenarios typically run a 25% weaker or stronger than normal stat line for each unit (~50%of the units will be same strengths as normal scenario values). Scenario designer can make this feature as wild and wooly as desired.

Adds a flavor of true unpredictability as you don't know for sure if your units (or the opponents units) are up to the job of attacking/defending until the first combat for each. A scenario with well defined strategies gets a different feel. Of course I usually only play the AI this way as the unpredictability can sway scenario competiviness in PBEM... if the PBEM is not hyper competitive, this is even more fun (again IMHO!).

Sorry if I missed this somewhere but how do the variants work in the ATD2 scenario? I'm playing a PBEM game of Husky where the allied navy was released early and I don't think we chose to have variants - they seem to just be happening in the scenario.

Does ATD2 work this way? If a PBEM game is started will variants occur? Or do they only occur if the "Mystery Area of Ops" option in chosen when setting up the game?

Thanks

Don't think variants affect when units evolve (which is how the Husky Naval units get wider movement areas). Those navy units should get wider movement on turns 19 & 20 (UK & US respectively). Getting different units from the stock stock scenario OOB via mystery options is a different situation (not 100% sure how that works, Troutie or Gregor might be able to explain better than I can).

Variants are set at game start via the start game options as you mention here.

This something I play from time-to-time. Truly the most underappreciated feature of SSG's games (IMHO anyways).

Stock scenarios typically run a 25% weaker or stronger than normal stat line for each unit (~50%of the units will be same strengths as normal scenario values). Scenario designer can make this feature as wild and wooly as desired.

Adds a flavor of true unpredictability as you don't know for sure if your units (or the opponents units) are up to the job of attacking/defending until the first combat for each. A scenario with well defined strategies gets a different feel. Of course I usually only play the AI this way as the unpredictability can sway scenario competiviness in PBEM... if the PBEM is not hyper competitive, this is even more fun (again IMHO!).

I would agree that the unknown units add another twist to the game. I generally set up the AI w/ unknown units and a mystery variant. It definitely increases the unpredictability of gameplay.

ORIGINAL: squatter For me, AOs are a great system. But they only work as long as your opponent is not aware of your AOs.

This is spot on, but SSG spends so much time trying to make the system 'non gamey' that I'm sure they must give up at some point. I've just played a few turns of ATD2 and watched with my ivans as the germans march past my troops, one hex beyond the AO, and I can't touch them

But from what I understand it was to prevent "gamey" tactics...the whole point of the AOs is to "mimick" real life situations. Apparently, the Russian command (I know Germany certainly done it) did not release units to attack at will, but rather keep forces specifically in reserve until objectives were met.

When I'm playing Kharkov, I see my little armour unit sitting there with a 5 sq hex that it can move around in and two objective flags. So I understand that in order for me to release those units prior to their "release turn", I have to get those objectives. It gives me focus on what I have to do if I want to employ those forces early.

I understand your frustration...but those kind of decisions were made back then by higher command.

And, unless they've changed the options on AtD2, you can play without AOs at all. Personally, I like the challenge it brings to my game. I normally throw everything but the kitchen sink at the enemy and seldom remember to employ a "breakthrough" unit or a reserve unit...so having it forced on me is a good idea. Maybe you should play with AOs off and maintain your own house rules?

"And, unless they've changed the options on AtD2, you can play without AOs at all. Personally, I like the challenge it brings to my game."

My point is not that AOs aren't a good feature, as I said earlier they are a great idea. But as they are coded currently they aren't achieving one of the main things they were designed to do: to prevent gamey tactics. As they are now, they in fact encourage more new gamey tactics because players know from experience what the AOs of the opposition are. It's the equivalent of having a spy reporting back to you from the enemy's general staff headquarters! One way to fix this would be to simply build more variation into the mystery variants options. Would this be extremely complex for the designers to do?

But as they are coded currently they aren't achieving one of the main things they were designed to do: to prevent gamey tactics. As they are now, they in fact encourage more new gamey tactics because players know from experience what the AOs of the opposition are.

That's only true if you know what AOs are in use, and I don't understand how that is possible with 10 different variations?

I would agree that more variants would be cool...although I do think it would be complex. It's not just about creating regions and objectives for the lock downs. These have to be balanced.

Lets say you have a unit stuck in a 25 hex region through turns 1 - 6 and objectives to release those units early. The player has to have a chance of achieving those objectives. The defender has to have a chance of defending those objectives. So each variant has to be balanced.

If you give the editor a try, you'll see what the developer has to go through for each scenario/variant...it's a lot more complex than you think (if I'm reading your post correctly).

Reserves were kept because it was advantageous to do so. So if a game is realistic, it should encourage the player to keep a reserve or else he should lose.

I personally don't have a clear opinion on whether the AOs are good or not, but it would be paradoxical if a feature introduced to make the game more realistic and less gamey would have the opposite effect...

You guys are gamers, and pretty hard core ones at that, so designing a system of any complexity that completely eliminates gamey tactics is more or less impossible.

In our view, the AO system has a number of compelling benefits which deserve to be listed against any possible problems.

They inform the human player, as mentioned above, as to what is expected of his formations. This is critical in a large battle like ATD.

They likewise inform the AI, and make it much, much smarter than it could possibly be without them.

They do prevent a whole range of abuses which gamers were guilty of inflicting on our earlier game systems which didn't have AOs.

Notice that I said gamers were guilty, because I think people should take a measure of responsibility for your actions. Most competitive human endeavours have both a spirit and a letter of the law, and I don't think gamers can abuse the spirit while heaping sole blame on us for not configuring the letter of the law to stop them.

Ask yourselves whether you would prefer SSG to spend time tying our scenarios in knots in a probably futile attempt to prevent all possible cheesy tactics, or providing as level a playing field as possible and letting sensible men make sensible decisions, while we make new scenarios and games.

And by the way, for the record, I love the AOs and the Mystery Variants and it was the sole thing that got me to buy Kharkov and why I came to love the system. When Kharkov was released, I wasn't buying and paying that money for one scenario. When I read about AOs and Mystery Variants, I realised 1 scenario turned into 1 scenario with many variations. I was sold once I tried them out.

I too get frustrated when I see some units passing by my forces and I can't move to intercept with my stronger, punchier units...but I just relax and take it as granted that tha's the way it was...they are being ordered not to move as they have more pressing objectives. It's not their area, and not their field and to leave alone - other units will have to deal with the incursion. That's the way I play them.

By the way, fired AtD2 up last night and was in awe at the size. Confused why I paid so much for Kharkov only to pay less for an addon which is bigger than the original game...that's never happened before

And by the way, for the record, I love the AOs and the Mystery Variants...

I too get frustrated when I see some units passing by my forces and I can't move to intercept with my stronger, punchier units...but I just relax and take it as granted that tha's the way it was...they are being ordered not to move as they have more pressing objectives. It's not their area, and not their field and to leave alone - other units will have to deal with the incursion. That's the way I play them.

Agree totally. Maybe I mistakenly implied that I didn't like them, but I think they are great. As per your note it is disappointing to see some units just sitting outside the AO but I can live with that

You guys are gamers, and pretty hard core ones at that, so designing a system of any complexity that completely eliminates gamey tactics is more or less impossible.

In our view, the AO system has a number of compelling benefits which deserve to be listed against any possible problems.

They inform the human player, as mentioned above, as to what is expected of his formations. This is critical in a large battle like ATD.

They likewise inform the AI, and make it much, much smarter than it could possibly be without them.

They do prevent a whole range of abuses which gamers were guilty of inflicting on our earlier game systems which didn't have AOs.

Notice that I said gamers were guilty, because I think people should take a measure of responsibility for your actions. Most competitive human endeavours have both a spirit and a letter of the law, and I don't think gamers can abuse the spirit while heaping sole blame on us for not configuring the letter of the law to stop them.

Ask yourselves whether you would prefer SSG to spend time tying our scenarios in knots in a probably futile attempt to prevent all possible cheesy tactics, or providing as level a playing field as possible and letting sensible men make sensible decisions, while we make new scenarios and games.

Gregor

New scenarios and games. I'm not good enough to take advantage of gamey tactics anyway.

And by the way, for the record, I love the AOs and the Mystery Variants...

I too get frustrated when I see some units passing by my forces and I can't move to intercept with my stronger, punchier units...but I just relax and take it as granted that tha's the way it was...they are being ordered not to move as they have more pressing objectives. It's not their area, and not their field and to leave alone - other units will have to deal with the incursion. That's the way I play them.

Agree totally. Maybe I mistakenly implied that I didn't like them, but I think they are great. As per your note it is disappointing to see some units just sitting outside the AO but I can live with that

No - just for clarity, I didn't think you were saying you disliked them. I was just putting it out there that I'm a fan of them

After watching a few tutorial videos its the AO that makes this game stand out for me...I just an't afford the outlay as I one will need a bigger monitor to compensate for the black lines and two need a nvidea graphics card as the latest ATI drivers don't have an option to to fix scale ratio. Still I'd love to have it in my collection.

After watching a few tutorial videos its the AO that makes this game stand out for me...I just an't afford the outlay as I one will need a bigger monitor to compensate for the black lines and two need a nvidea graphics card as the latest ATI drivers don't have an option to to fix scale ratio. Still I'd love to have it in my collection.

With the ATI card you will NOT get black lines, since there is no option to maintain aspect ratio the game will fill your screen. Unless you mean black lines at the TOPof the screen if you won't have a wide screen monitor?

But surely that is not a reason not to buy the game.Note that with higher resolutions the icons are smaller, so with a small screen you have no advantage in having a higher resolution than the eye can resolve.

And by the way, for the record, I love the AOs and the Mystery Variants and it was the sole thing that got me to buy Kharkov and why I came to love the system. When Kharkov was released, I wasn't buying and paying that money for one scenario. When I read about AOs and Mystery Variants, I realised 1 scenario turned into 1 scenario with many variations. I was sold once I tried them out.

I too get frustrated when I see some units passing by my forces and I can't move to intercept with my stronger, punchier units...but I just relax and take it as granted that tha's the way it was...they are being ordered not to move as they have more pressing objectives. It's not their area, and not their field and to leave alone - other units will have to deal with the incursion. That's the way I play them.

By the way, fired AtD2 up last night and was in awe at the size. Confused why I paid so much for Kharkov only to pay less for an addon which is bigger than the original game...that's never happened before

Yeah, I have no problems when units are just out of reach of my AO, which you can put down to your orders. It's simply when you realise that your opponent has deliberately put them there because he knows the extent of your AOs which is what I'm complaining about.

And your point about "how can your opponent know where your AOs are with 10 mystery variants" brings me back to my original point: he can be reasonably sure where they are because there is such little variation in the mystery variants. This is the whole issue: each mystery variant needs more 'variation'. Most of them change the AOs very little, at least one of them doesnt change them at all!!

Of course we'd all like new scenarios, but for me this feature needs a little more tweaking for it to deliver everything it was desinged to deliver.